IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v10y2022i1p146-160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Same Same but Different? Gender Politics and (Trans-)National Value Contestation in Europe on Twitter

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Wallaschek

    (Interdisciplinary Centre for European Studies, Europa-Universität Flensburg, Germany)

  • Kavyanjali Kaushik

    (Department of Social Sciences, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain)

  • Monika Verbalyte

    (Interdisciplinary Centre for European Studies, Europa-Universität Flensburg, Germany)

  • Aleksandra Sojka

    (Department of Social Sciences, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain)

  • Giuliana Sorci

    (Faculty of Political and Social Sciences, Scuola Normale Superiore, Italy)

  • Hans-Jörg Trenz

    (Faculty of Political and Social Sciences, Scuola Normale Superiore, Italy)

  • Monika Eigmüller

    (Interdisciplinary Centre for European Studies, Europa-Universität Flensburg, Germany)

Abstract

The progress achieved in women’s rights and gender equality has become the target of a backlash driven by “anti-gender” activists and right-wing populists across EU member states. To a large extent, this conflict takes place in the digital and social media spheres, illustrating the new mediatized logic of value contestation. Therefore, we ask to what extent are the debates about gender equality on Twitter similar in three European countries, and how do users engage in these debates? We examine these questions by collecting Twitter data around the 2021 International Women’s Day in Germany, Italy, and Poland. First, we show that the debate remains nationally segmented and is predominantly supportive of gender equality. While citizens engage with the gender equality value online, they do so in a prevailingly acclamatory fashion. In contrast, political and societal actors show higher levels of engagement with the value and receive more interactions on Twitter. Our study highlights the relevance of national contexts to the analysis of (transnational) social media debates and the limited political engagement of citizens on Twitter across Europe. We also critically discuss the strengths and weaknesses of a cross-country social media comparison.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Wallaschek & Kavyanjali Kaushik & Monika Verbalyte & Aleksandra Sojka & Giuliana Sorci & Hans-Jörg Trenz & Monika Eigmüller, 2022. "Same Same but Different? Gender Politics and (Trans-)National Value Contestation in Europe on Twitter," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 146-160.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:10:y:2022:i:1:p:146-160
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4751
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pieter de Wilde & Astrid Rasch & Michael Bossetta, 2022. "Analyzing Citizen Engagement With European Politics on Social Media," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 90-96.
    2. Felix Bossner & Melanie Nagel, 2020. "Discourse Networks and Dual Screening: Analyzing Roles, Content and Motivations in Political Twitter Conversations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 311-325.
    3. Mitcham, Carl & Emeritus,, 2021. "Science policy and democracy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Tsang, Eric W. K., 2014. "Old and New," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(03), pages 390-390, November.
    5. Cilia Willem & Iolanda Tortajada, 2021. "Gender, Voice and Online Space: Expressions of Feminism on Social Media in Spain," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 62-71.
    6. Stefan Wallaschek & Christopher Starke & Carlotta Brüning, 2020. "Solidarity in the Public Sphere: A Discourse Network Analysis of German Newspapers (2008–2017)," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 257-271.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Reveilhac Maud & Eisner Léïla, 2022. "Political Polarisation on Gender Equality: The Case of the Swiss Women’s Strike on Twitter," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 13(3), pages 255-278, November.
    2. Pieter de Wilde & Astrid Rasch & Michael Bossetta, 2022. "Analyzing Citizen Engagement With European Politics on Social Media," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 90-96.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ali Shalizar Jalali, 2018. "Male Fertility as a Bull’s Eye for Mastocytosis," Global Journal of Reproductive Medicine, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 3(3), pages 58-60, February.
    2. Nikolov, Plamen & Adelman, Alan, 2019. "Do private household transfers to the elderly respond to public pension benefits? Evidence from rural China," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).
    3. Dana Benešová & Viera Kubičková & Miroslava Prváková, 2020. "Open innovation model in the knowledge intensive business services in the Slovak Republic," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 8(2), pages 1340-1358, December.
    4. Selman, P., 2014. "Intercountry Adoption Agencies and the HCIA," ISS Working Papers - General Series 77404, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    5. Martinho, Vítor João Pereira Domingues, 2019. "Historical records of wine: Highlighting the old wine world," EconStor Preprints 193461, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    6. Trine Filges & Anu Siren & Torben Fridberg & Bjørn C. V. Nielsen, 2020. "Voluntary work for the physical and mental health of older volunteers: A systematic review," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), December.
    7. Alexandru-Ionuţ Petrişor & Walid Hamma & Huu Duy Nguyen & Giovanni Randazzo & Anselme Muzirafuti & Mari-Isabella Stan & Van Truong Tran & Roxana Aştefănoaiei & Quang-Thanh Bui & Dragoş-Florian Vintilă, 2020. "Degradation of Coastlines under the Pressure of Urbanization and Tourism: Evidence on the Change of Land Systems from Europe, Asia and Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-43, August.
    8. repec:ers:journl:v:special_issue:y:2018:i:1:p:466-478 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Sellami Sana & Verhaest Dieter & Nonneman Walter & Van Trier Walter, 2017. "The Impact of Educational Mismatches on Wages: The Influence of Measurement Error and Unobserved Heterogeneity," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 17(1), pages 1-20, February.
    10. Marek Kwiek & Wojciech Roszka, 2022. "Academic vs. biological age in research on academic careers: a large-scale study with implications for scientifically developing systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3543-3575, June.
    11. Kenneth M. Johnson & Daniel T. Lichter, 2016. "Diverging Demography: Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Contributions to U.S. Population Redistribution and Diversity," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 35(5), pages 705-725, October.
    12. Su, Guifu & Tu, Jianhua & Das, Kinkar Ch., 2015. "Graphs with fixed number of pendent vertices and minimal Zeroth-order general Randić index," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 270(C), pages 705-710.
    13. Zbigniew Drewniak & Rafal Drewniak & Robert Karaszewski, 2020. "The Assessment of the Features of Inter-organisational Relationships: Benefits, Duration, Repeatability and Maturity of the Relationship with the Company's Stakeholders," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 1), pages 443-461.
    14. Tanja Lepistö & Tiina Mäkitalo-Keinonen & Tiina Valjakka, 0. "Opportunity recognition in a hub-governed network – insights from garage services," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    15. Sierra, Jazmin & Hochstetler, Kathryn, 2017. "Transnational activist networks and rising powers: transparency and environmental concerns in the Brazilian National Development Bank," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 79089, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Carlo Borzaga & Silvia Sacchetti, 2015. "Why Social Enterprises Are Asking to Be Multi-stakeholder and Deliberative: An Explanation around the Costs of Exclusion," Euricse Working Papers 1575, Euricse (European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises).
    17. Mukhamedova, Nozilakhon & Wegerich, Kai, 2018. "The feminization of agriculture in post-Soviet Tajikistan," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 57, pages 128-139.
    18. Olivera, Javier & Andreoli, Francesco & Leist, Anja K. & Chauvel, Louis, 2018. "Inequality in old age cognition across the world," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 179-188.
    19. Guillermo Montt, 2017. "Field-of-study mismatch and overqualification: labour market correlates and their wage penalty," IZA Journal of Labor Economics, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 6(1), pages 1-20, December.
    20. Mariusz Próchniak & Bartosz Witkowski, 2015. "Stochastic Convergence of the European Union Countries: A Conditional Approach," Collegium of Economic Analysis Annals, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis, issue 39, pages 41-56.
    21. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:10:y:2022:i:1:p:146-160. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.